Eddie Evans Crime Scene Cleanup

This type of web site lends itself to the owner's choices. Here I choose to write a bit about ethics in crime scene cleanup.

First, I must note that what I write gives us little reason for joy, or to be thrilled, or moved by, these works. We do have reason to amire some novels, plays, or poems. We do know the importance of some of the ideas that they express. But here we concentrate on ethics as it stands in relation to Eddie Evans and crime scene cleanup.

Readers will understand that this writer has little regard for one ethical proposition: because something is desired for its own sake, it has value from the way it affects us. We confer value on it by liking lt. So if I say, "I like chocolate candy" I'm conferring value on it. If I say, "I like to inject heroin into my vains," I'm conferring value on heroin injection. We know better.

We know to that valuing in this way of desires confers little value on what we do not desire. So what does this say for species in the wild? How about 99 percent of Sacramento's salmon becoming decimated? In short, desires show little help in establishing what we value, truly value. Our future pleasures or pains are not made to bre good or bad by our current desire to avoid pain. It's not likely that meta-hedonic desires actually confer universal value on pain or pleasure.

We interest ourselves with value-creating-power on these pages. Why else would Eddie Evans seek out WHAT MATTERS. In the end it seems good to have sensations that we like, but nothing is merely good because we want this thing.

We have rational desires when what we want features that give us reasons to want them. We have reasons not to want some events leaading to more features that we want. So we must understant that we become irrational by desiring an event we do not want, or no reasons, or only weaker reasons to want. Irrationality becomes a matter of degree as we find our desires for what we don't want tappering off. Note the case of heorin and chocolate's affects.

How about a painful experience compared to an even more painful experience. We come to prefer the lesser painful of these two events. Reason tells us so, unless there's more to the painful experience. Perhaps accepting a more painful tortur with the promise that doing so may save many more thousands of lives. Such an event would fit most crime scene cleanup ethics frameworks.

Whose side are you on? 

Not one of the Internet's articles on crime scene cleanup approach the journalistic standards that prior generations of North Americans came to expect. Put another way, articles on How Crime Scene Clean-up Works reflect a lack of research and critical thinking. It seems that their information sounds like the infomation-propaganda we've come to expect from the multimillionaire owned Fox "news industry." 

One. Imagine H. L. Mencken's urgent thinking and then think of today's wimpy net writers. 

I see what these writers have done, besides going-along-to-get along. They have generally performed their craft good enough, but why should any person lift an eyebrow? Well, they do a fair amount of damage to earnest people, that's why. Consumers and upbeat job hunters fall victim to the Internet's crime scene cleanup rhetoric. 

A close reading of these articles reflects a bias for their subject, rather than an objective" who, what, when, where, how" research approach to journalism. Where's the information that folk looking for actual info need? Perhaps a couple or even more of these writers simply promote corporatism. 

Concepts like "safe," "shallow," "simple," "meaningless," " misleading," "white bread" and "Where's the meat?" strike the vital reader interested in the genuine story. 

Writers of these "gore" stories regularly pivot their themes on 2 extremes, cash and gore. Readers of these stories might wonder how so many folks missed out on the wonderful openings to earn their fortune. What a wonderland of strife-free profits exist in the sector of crime scene cleanup! 

Horror and Perils 

The small cleaning firms know pretty well that they will not suffer injury on cleanups. They're expecting a good-looking profit for the "ugh" factor, the horror and stink of it all. The enormous cleaning companies pretty well know that their work won't suffer injury during cleanups. They are expecting a hunky profit because they do what they do, not because their work suffers the horror and smell of it all. In part, whether small or huge, what makes these corporations "work" emerges from legislation and insurance. They do not create wealth as we have come to comprehend the creation of wealth. 

The facts reflect that many folk come to believe what they read. They suspect that $100 per hour follows right after getting "into the business" and "going to crime scene cleanup school." As an "industry" able of soaking up the hoards attempting to find work, the need for crime scene cleaners remains small and will continue so indefinitely. Too many companies compete for too few jobs. Their numbers grow swiftly. For those with the means this school serves as the mode Crime Scene Cleanup School ; for others, go into nursing. 
Many dreamers wasted thousands of bucks to go to a "crime scene cleanup college" because of what they read online. ( The Internet's crime scene cleanup propaganda machine continues to send more victims to these faculties then we shall ever know. They are going on a guarantee, a dream, and hopes of being one of the few "able to bear" the horror and reek of it all. More will read from the crime scene cleanup disinformation machine and waste their time and cash. 

They suspect that they'll risk their lives in an entire world of bloodborne pathogens. They believe that they can resist monstrous sights and dreadful odors to escape the numbing minimum wage world of work. They believe these ideas till mugged by fact. 

The unvarnished reality of biohazards in crime scene cleanup simply don't exist in bloodborne pathogens as we read. Of course, The Peter Principle rules at all points, but the truth resides somewhere else. The likelihood of suffering bloodborne pathogen injuries on a crime scene cleanup pales when compared to the probability of suffering traffic related wounds to crime scene cleanup. Simply wearing protective hardware reduces the danger terribly efficiently. 

If the biohazards of cleaning crime scenes justify tens of thousand of dollars for simple decomposition cleanups, how can we explain staff ' relative low wages in such a dangerous occupation? 

How will we explain statistical tracking of bloodborn contracted diseases among medical staff and not crime scene cleaners? Simple, there aren't any known reports available for crime scene cleaners contracting bloodborne pathogen diseases from crime scene cleanup. When the 1st such casualty appears I'll be first to publish the news if I can. 

Moving on, here's a utterly meaningless statement meriting our vital attention : 

"The requirement of a cleaning agent at the crime scene has ended in a moneymaking industry of crime cleanup jobs." 

We read, "a lucrative industry of crime cleanup jobs" without as much as a blink. A profitable industry of crime scene cleanup roles for whom? Who did this writer get to offer up their employment experience as a crime scene cleaner? Did "Crime scene cleaners" ever hope to earn $100 to $600" in a crime scene cleanup crony-filled country? Are you able to see people lining up for crime scene cleanup college expecting to land one of these $100 per hour roles? 

Crime Scene Cleanup Commodified 

This is how crime scene cleanup truly works. We see that work must clean after horrorific deaths. This work becomes a commodity ( something to be purchased and sold ) in crime scene cleanup. So the crime scene cleaner's work and the effects of death create work. Again, a chance to buy and sell crime scene cleanup work now exists like every other commodity. In Adam Smith's language, classical industrial language, the employed crime scene cleaner ( the proletariate ) sells her or his labor to the crime scene cleanup company ( the bourgeoisie ). 
The crime scene cleanup company crystallizes the cleaner's work in the shape of surplus value profit. It's the same commodification of self by selling one's labor or purchasing the other's work that outlines capitalism. It's all the same regardless of if a violent crime, violent suicide, or unattended death cleanup : buy cheap and sell dear. Buy labor cheap and sell it dear to someone else, like an insurance corporation, that is. 

The net effect of this relationship equals profits derived from the labor of crime scene cleaners less materials. What could actually be easier? 

Rates drop dramatically. 

Established companies vanish. 

Associate firms disappear. 

Small firms flourish.